Search for: "Does 1-35" Results 8581 - 8600 of 9,554
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Aug 2009, 10:33 pm
No. 1528 (S.C.), where the court held at para. 17 that lack of timeliness does not necessarily preclude an application to strike a jury notice. [read post]
28 Jul 2009, 3:00 am
If your click-through rate is 1 percent it will require 20,000 e-mails. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 5:45 pm
At the district court, claims 1-35 were held invalid for indefiniteness. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 10:45 am
" Id. at 1333.Bottom line -->In summary, we affirm the district court's decision that claims 1-35 are invalid as indefinite. [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 2:04 pm
I think that the law does not seek to protect only those who are involved in a sexual relationship and exclud[e] those who are involved in fraternization, but the law does not mean to exclude those who are involved in somewhat of a dating relationship where one person becomes obsessed with the other one. [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 10:59 am
(via Fish & Richardson) Related posts:How Long Does it Take for the Patent Office to Look at National Entry Papers? [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 5:55 pm
If the Paulsons have $35 million to hand him, he's not going anywhere. [read post]
18 Jul 2009, 8:39 am
New facts have been alleged in the TAC and incorporated by reference in paragraphs 34-35. [read post]
18 Jul 2009, 7:31 am
Schapiro announced two changes to the enforcement process at the SEC intended to “empower” the staff of the Enforcement Division. [1] First, Chairman Schapiro ended a two-year “pilot” program, implemented by the prior Chairman, which required the Enforcement staff to seek prior approval of the Commission before negotiating a civil money penalty against a public company for alleged securities fraud. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 4:29 am
Looking at Sabrina Pacifici's BePacific.com today, I was struck by the confluence of several stories:1. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 10:36 am
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and DOES 1-20, and each of them, as follows: 1) For damages for failure to provide benefits under the Policy, plus interest, including prejudgment interest in a sum according to proof at the time of trial; 2) For compensatory damages in a sum according to proof at the time of trial; 3) For general damages in a sum according to proof at the time of trial; 4) For special damages in a sum according… [read post]
12 Jul 2009, 1:45 pm
Q.1: Was it necessary for the Bench to use 20 pages of its judgment to sum up the arguments? [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 6:56 am
These are the options currently on the table: * Expanding the 1.45% Medicare payroll tax on earned income to "passive income," or unearned income, which could raise $100 billion; * A 5% surtax on individuals who earn more than $500,000 and couples who earn more than $1 million;* A tax on employer-sponsored health benefits at a level higher than previously considered, with one proposal to tax plans worth more than $20,300 for a family and $8,300 for an individual. [read post]